There are a number of laws that dictate - and provide legal defences for - crime and court reporting.

For example, The Defamation Act gives journalists 'privilege', which means the right to report whatever is said, even if it’s defamatory. There are different levels of privilege and in a courtroom journalists have absolute privilege, whereas at a council meeting they only have qualified privilege.

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 also states that no court can force a person to identify a source of information unless it's necessary 'in the interests of justice or national security' or 'for the prevention of disorder and crime'. This single sentence gives us the legal power to protect anonymous sources, such as whistleblowers who could lose their job for giving information to a journalist.

And the same law gave the courts the power for the first time to restrict the press. So let's explore it in more detail.

What is contempt of court?

What is contempt of court?

The Contempt of Court Act 1981 protects the integrity of court proceedings in the UK. It ensures defendants receive a fair trial - a human right - and makes any actions that could prejudice proceedings (i.e. publishing something that could influence a jury) a criminal offence.

The Act applies to 'active' criminal proceedings. They are active from arrest without warrant, oral charge or the issue of an arrest warrant or summons - whichever happens first.

Criminal proceedings end on an acquittal or sentence, a trial verdict or a charge dismissal.

During active cases, the media - and anyone else - cannot publish anything that carries a substantial risk of serious prejudice to proceedings.

Prejudicing a trial can cause it to collapse, as the jury may be deemed unable to deliver a fair verdict - at great cost to the court (and therefore the British taxpayer). A retrial means beginning the trial from the start with a new jury.

The reporting restriction

Reporting restrictions prohibit or restrict media reports by law and can be automatic or discretionary. There are different types. S4(2) of this Act is one of them.

S4(2) gives judges the power to postpone the reporting of court cases until a verdict is reached if they feel publication of certain information carries a serious prejudice. A 'blanket' reporting restriction means it apples to even reporting the basic status of the proceedings. This does not mean that the case will never be reported on, simply that it has to be delayed for legal reasons.

Circumstances where the power can be used includes where two or more trials are due to take place which are closely connected. Lawyers may apply for an order to be made if they believe publication of reports of the first trial could cause substantial risk of prejudice to subsequent trials.

If the judge is satisfied that the order is necessary, they must balance the competing public interests between protecting the administration of justice and ensuring open justice.

Judges' guidelines state that this order should only be used as a last resort.

Who can commit contempt?

The main types of criminal contempt are failing to answer questions in court, physically interfering with a trial, threatening witnesses and conduct obstructing or calculated to prejudice the due administration of justice.

Members of the press can commit contempt, meaning individual journalists can go to jail for making a mistake at work. Reporters cannot be held in contempt so long as their reports are 'fair and accurate', 'published contemporaneously' and 'in good faith'. Journalists are trained in media law by the National Council for the Training of Journalists. We're also trained in a form of note taking called shorthand, allowing us to accurately transcribe what witnesses, lawyers and judges say at speeds of 100 words per minute or more and not rely on the use of recording devices, which are banned in courts under this law. So we're expected and trusted to know what we're doing, which is why we're also allowed to use electronic devices and the internet in court.

As anyone who's ever served on a jury will know, jurors are given instructions to consider the defendant's guilt solely on the basis of evidence in the case and not to carry out their own research. They can commit a contempt by breaching these rules, such as by going to the scene of a crime or contacting a defendant.

Section 8 of the Act makes it an offence for a person to ask for or make public any opinions or arguments put forward by a jury member in the course of making a decision.

As seen with the recent jailing of far right activist Tommy Robinson, members of the public can also commit contempt. They can make the same mistakes as members of the press, including breaching a reporting restriction by discussing a case online or even in a public speech or by taking photos or any form of recordings in court or in the 'precincts of the court' (the court steps). Insulting legal staff or witnesses, interupting proceedings in court or 'misbehaving' in court are also contempts. A frequent sight for a court reporter is an outburst from the public gallery during a trial being met with a judge threatening: "Sit down and be quiet or I will hold you in contempt."

Read More

What happens next?

Due to the nature of the offence, the defendant can be taken immediately to custody for up to a month. Any alleged contempt is prioritised by the courts and dealt with quickly.

A hearing will take place in which the court - not a jury - will decide whether the action constituted a contempt.

The defendant cannot plead guilty or not guilty, but can 'admit' the contempt or be 'found' or 'held' in contempt.

The maximum sentence for contempt of court is two years' imprisonment, but it can also be punished with a fine.

What are the defences?

The strict liability rule means means an action 'tending to interfere with the course of justice' can be seen as contempt 'regardless of intent to do so'. In other words, "but I didn't realise your Honour!" isn't an excuse.

The two main defences are that a person did not know proceedings were active or that their action was likely to cause prejudice, but the person must have taken all reasonable care to check these things and must be able to prove this.

ExaminerLive has launched a Facebook group to help you keep up to date with the latest reports from Kirklees Magistrates' Court, Leeds Crown Court and Bradford Crown Court. Join us here.